New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday substantially enhanced compensation awarded to a Uttarakhand carpenter who lost his right leg in a road accident, holding that courts must assess the real impact of an injury on a victim’s livelihood and recognise “functional disability” rather than mechanically relying on medical disability certificates.
A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N.V. Anjaria increased the compensation payable to claimant Shankar Dutt from Rs 11.51 lakh, as awarded by the Uttarakhand High Court, to Rs 35.95 lakh, observing that the amputation of his right leg had rendered him incapable of continuing his profession as a carpenter.
Allowing the appeal, the apex court held that while the medical disability certificate assessed the claimant’s permanent disability at 70 per cent, his functional disability for the purpose of earning a livelihood had to be treated as 100 per cent.
“The disability of the appellant has to be appreciated and assessed in the context of the occupation of the appellant, the activity of work he used to do as a carpenter. The functional disability of the appellant-claimant has to be taken properly and reasonably at 100 per cent,” the Justice Bhuyan-led Bench said.
The case arose from a road accident on November 9, 2004, when the appellant, then aged 38 and working as a carpenter, suffered grievous injuries after a jeep, allegedly being driven rashly and negligently, hit his motorcycle near Kotdwar in Uttarakhand.
Due to the severity of injuries, his right leg had to be amputated above the knee. He remained hospitalised for about 43 days.
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MCAT) awarded compensation of Rs 4.77 lakh in 2012, which was enhanced by the Uttarakhand High Court to Rs 11.51 lakh.
Still dissatisfied, he approached the Supreme Court seeking further enhancement.
Examining the nature of the claimant’s occupation, the apex court observed that carpentry is a skilled profession requiring manual dexterity and physical mobility.
“A carpenter is a skilled worker, who works to bring into existence various items of wood by his expertise and dexterity,” the judgment said, adding that the claimant’s occupation could not be equated with unskilled labour while assessing notional income.
The Justice Bhuyan-led Bench held that the Uttarakhand High Court had erred in assessing the claimant’s monthly income at Rs 5,000 and revised it to Rs 9,000, observing that a skilled worker would ordinarily have greater earning potential.
Referring to earlier precedents, the apex court reiterated that compensation in disability cases must be based on the actual impact of the injury on earning capacity.
“When it comes to assessing the compensation in the context of the injury suffered, what matters is the extent by which the functions of an injured person suffers, and not what the doctor may have judged in terms of medical standards,” it observed.
It added that a carpenter necessarily needs to sit and use both legs while working and that the claimant was no longer able to sit in a squatting or cross-legged position because of the amputation.
“When the appellant is not able to sit either in a squatted way or with a crossed leg, it is evident that he will not be able to perform the carpentry work. It is essential and indispensable for a carpenter to sit to do the carpentry works,” the top court said.
Holding that the claimant had effectively lost his entire earning capacity, it recalculated compensation by treating his functional disability as 100 per cent and granting a 40 per cent addition towards future prospects.
The judgment also highlighted the long-term financial burden faced by amputees requiring prosthetic limbs. Observing that artificial limbs require periodic replacement and maintenance throughout a person’s lifetime, the Justice Bhuyan-led Bench awarded Rs 10 lakh towards future medical expenses, including the cost and upkeep of prosthetic legs.
“The appellant must be compensated in a manner and to the extent that he is able to live life in the future years almost in the same way as he was leading his life prior to the accident,” the top court said.
Apart from compensation for loss of future earnings, it awarded amounts under several other heads, including pain and suffering, loss of amenities, attendant charges, transportation, nutrition and incidental expenses, as well as loss of income during the treatment period.
The Supreme Court directed respondent insurer United India Insurance Company to deposit the additional compensation amount of about Rs 24.44 lakh, along with interest at 6 per cent per annum, before the MCAT within six weeks.
(IANS)
